I drove the 1997 Prelude too. uggh!
Tom
You took the words right outta my mouth.
I drove one today---finally my local dealership got one in.
LOOKS DEPARTMENT: I've read some messages here saying that the car isn't
as ugly in person as it is in the mags...and that the car "grows on
you"---well, it isn't ugly, but it sure ain't pretty either. I got the
feeling that Honda's designers of the last Prelude and the designers of
the current Accord/Civic were at each other's throats during the design
process and finally decided to each submit a new design for the Prelude
and "morph" their ideas together. What they ended up with was a
"Preccord". A family car that wishes it could look like a sports car.
As far as it growing on me, I think I'll start growing a tail on my ass
before this new design grows on me. The headlights are truly monstrous
in person. They look like two big spotlights on the front of the car.
They're so big that they're almost hypnotic --- "loooook into my
eyes...you're getting sleeeeeepy...verrry sleeepy....." The back is
dull---the trunk design and tail-lights look like something from the
"auto-maker's cookie-cutter designs handbook". Nice touch, though with
the 16" wheels (But the Prelude should have gotten these 5 years ago)
The interior is comfortable, but bland. I could see 4 average-sized
adults fitting without too much trouble.
DRIVING: This car is about as exciting to drive as an Accord. Sure,
it's refined --- but it's refined to the point of losing it's identity
as a sports car. After driving it, I can finally see what Honda had in
mind. They wanted a family sports car...a compromise. A car that
husband and wife can both feel comfortable
driving.....translated.....another run-of-the-mill everyday car with no
character.
Stephen and Ann Blair wrote:
>
> rl...@aol.com wrote:
> : Just test drove one today. It handled nice and it's fairly quiet. The
> : acceleration, however, is not head snapping. The car is quite larger than
> : the 96 model. The body style looks like a cross between a 944 and a
> : Cadillac. Huge headlights. Probably would cost a fortune to replace.
> : The stereo was not impressive. The sticker price is one dollar under
> : $25,000. I like the car and would buy if it is only $23,000.
>
> The MSRP for a five-speed is $23,595.
young steve
Tom wrote:
>
> LOOKS DEPARTMENT: I've read some messages here saying that the car isn't
> as ugly in person as it is in the mags...and that the car "grows on
> you"---well, it isn't ugly, but it sure ain't pretty either. I got the
> feeling that Honda's designers of the last Prelude and the designers of
> the current Accord/Civic were at each other's throats during the design
> process and finally decided to each submit a new design for the Prelude
> and "morph" their ideas together. What they ended up with was a
> "Preccord". A family car that wishes it could look like a sports car.
> As far as it growing on me, I think I'll start growing a tail on my ass
> before this new design grows on me.
When the last generation Prelude came out, initial immpressions were
mostly negative - they were saying the car was out of proportion as the
rear was too "fat" compared to the front and the dashboard looked like
something out of an Oldsmobile (which wasn't a compliment). But then
opinions changed, the car started showing up on "10 Bests" lists and
sales went well through the years. So, while I would definitely agree
that the Prelude is no looker now, lets wait and see what happens. Who
knows, in a couple of years, people may be stepping on your tail as they
rush to a Honda dealer for their new Prelude. ;-)
By the way, how do you define a "sports car"? This Prelude may not fit
your definition as a sports car, but to others, with that high rpm
purring VTEC engine, superior handling & performance, coupe styling and
2+2 seating, it is definitely a sports car.
> DRIVING: This car is about as exciting to drive as an Accord. Sure,
> it's refined --- but it's refined to the point of losing it's identity
> as a sports car. After driving it, I can finally see what Honda had in
> mind. They wanted a family sports car...a compromise. A car that
> husband and wife can both feel comfortable
> driving.....translated.....another run-of-the-mill everyday car with no
> character.
>
I haven't driven the new one yet, but all the reviews (C&D, MT, R&D,
Automobile Magazines) on the Prelude's handling and performance were
positive and none compared it to an Accord. Were you driving an auto or
manual trans? With its high rpm VTEC engine, it's hard to mistake the
feel of a Prelude for an Accord. In acceleration alone, the Prelude
betters the Accord by a couple of seconds to 60, which is VERY
significant.
Steve
David Masten
In article <329561...@enterprise.ca>, young steve <you...@enterprise.ca> wrote:
>Tom wrote:
>When the last generation Prelude came out, initial immpressions were
>mostly negative -
True
> they were saying the car was out of proportion as the
>rear was too "fat" compared to the front and the dashboard looked like
>something out of an Oldsmobile (which wasn't a compliment).
True, and I for one stick by them.
> But then
>opinions changed, the car started showing up on "10 Bests" lists and
>sales went well through the years.
I think it showed up on these 10 best lists *despite* the looks and the
dash. Read the reviews. They don't talk about its beautiful curves and
striking visage. They talk about the engine, the transmission, the
handling.
The sales have not done well. Compare to the previous generation. About
1/3 as many sold per year. Part is attributable to the decline of the
expensive sporty coupe and sports car market. But I don't think that
fully explains it. The price didn't even increase all that much. No, it
was primarily the looks and loss of utility.
> So, while I would definitely agree
>that the Prelude is no looker now, lets wait and see what happens. Who
>knows, in a couple of years, people may be stepping on your tail as they
>rush to a Honda dealer for their new Prelude. ;-)
Perhaps. But I doubt it. Even Honda's sales goals are humble, less than
20K/yr. If the last Prelude became more attractive with time, I argue (pure
conjecture of course) that it was just due to it gaining familiarity. Not
due to it being ahead of its time and the public coming to appreciate that.
Why is it so hard to design a car that most, heck even a substantial
minority, find attractive now?
>By the way, how do you define a "sports car"? This Prelude may not fit
>your definition as a sports car, but to others, with that high rpm
>purring VTEC engine, superior handling & performance, coupe styling and
>2+2 seating, it is definitely a sports car.
I don't worry about these limited "sports car" definitions. You might find
some here who insist on it being 2-seat, some convertible. Hell, you can
probably find some who say it has to be red and have a prancing horse on the
front :-)
>I haven't driven the new one yet, but all the reviews (C&D, MT, R&D,
>Automobile Magazines) on the Prelude's handling and performance were
>positive and none compared it to an Accord. Were you driving an auto or
>manual trans? With its high rpm VTEC engine, it's hard to mistake the
>feel of a Prelude for an Accord. In acceleration alone, the Prelude
>betters the Accord by a couple of seconds to 60, which is VERY
>significant.
Agreed. Just because a car is quiet, it is condemned??
Tom
young steve wrote:
>
> Tom wrote:
> >
> > I think I'll start growing a tail on my ass
> > before this new design grows on me.
>
> while I would definitely agree
> that the Prelude is no looker now, lets wait and see what happens. Who
> knows, in a couple of years, people may be stepping on your tail as they
> rush to a Honda dealer for their new Prelude. ;-)
Good one :) I'll be sure to wrap my tail around my waist before that
happens. --- Actually, I think Honda knows that this car is no looker.
The salesman I spoke with told me that there is already a full body kit
available from Honda for the car to make it more appealing. My question
is---if they knew the car was ugly, why didn't they just put the body
kit on it in the first place?
> By the way, how do you define a "sports car"? This Prelude may not fit
> your definition as a sports car, but to others, with that high rpm
> purring VTEC engine, superior handling & performance, coupe styling and
> 2+2 seating, it is definitely a sports car.
A sports car to me is not just 2+2 seating and a snappy engine. It's
also the vibe that you get from the car. It's the "feel" you get when
driving and looking at the car. If I remember correctly, Yugo had a car
called the "Yugo Sport" with a snappier engine and some other mods. Did
you consider that a sports car too?
> Were you driving an auto or
> manual trans? With its high rpm VTEC engine, it's hard to mistake the
> feel of a Prelude for an Accord. In acceleration alone, the Prelude
> betters the Accord by a couple of seconds to 60, which is VERY
> significant.
>
It was an automatic which admittedly is going to seem sorry compared to
driving a stick (in any car)---but that's all they had so that's what I
based my driving opinion on. When I get ahold of a 5-speed, maybe I'll
get more of a thrill --- but I doubt it.
M. Harmon
David Masten wrote:
>
> In article <329561...@enterprise.ca>, young steve <you...@enterprise.ca> wrote:
> >Tom wrote:
>
> >When the last generation Prelude came out, initial immpressions were
> >mostly negative -
>
> True
>
> > they were saying the car was out of proportion as the
> >rear was too "fat" compared to the front and the dashboard looked like
> >something out of an Oldsmobile (which wasn't a compliment).
>
> True, and I for one stick by them.
>
> > But then
> >opinions changed, the car started showing up on "10 Bests" lists and
> >sales went well through the years.
>
> I think it showed up on these 10 best lists *despite* the looks and the
> dash. Read the reviews. They don't talk about its beautiful curves and
> striking visage. They talk about the engine, the transmission, the
> handling.
>
> The sales have not done well. Compare to the previous generation. About
> 1/3 as many sold per year. Part is attributable to the decline of the
> expensive sporty coupe and sports car market. But I don't think that
> fully explains it. The price didn't even increase all that much. No, it
> was primarily the looks and loss of utility.
>
> >that the Prelude is no looker now, lets wait and see what happens. Who
> >knows, in a couple of years, people may be stepping on your tail as they
> >rush to a Honda dealer for their new Prelude. ;-)
>
> 20K/yr. If the last Prelude became more attractive with time, I argue (pure
> conjecture of course) that it was just due to it gaining familiarity. Not
> due to it being ahead of its time and the public coming to appreciate that.
> Why is it so hard to design a car that most, heck even a substantial
> minority, find attractive now?
>
> >your definition as a sports car, but to others, with that high rpm
> >purring VTEC engine, superior handling & performance, coupe styling and
> >2+2 seating, it is definitely a sports car.
>
> some here who insist on it being 2-seat, some convertible. Hell, you can
> probably find some who say it has to be red and have a prancing horse on the
> front :-)
>
> >I haven't driven the new one yet, but all the reviews (C&D, MT, R&D,
> >Automobile Magazines) on the Prelude's handling and performance were
> >manual trans? With its high rpm VTEC engine, it's hard to mistake the
> >feel of a Prelude for an Accord. In acceleration alone, the Prelude
> >betters the Accord by a couple of seconds to 60, which is VERY
> >significant.
>
The 95, 96 Preludes were way ahead of everybody, Look at the new Ferrari. Now I might be biased but if
you take a careful look at the relevant data the previous generation of Preludes will go down in history
as the greatest in the saga of Preludes so far.
Dave Simons
On Fri, 22 Nov 1996 13:33:38 -0800, Tom <usa...@usadvertiser.com>
wrote:
>Good one :) I'll be sure to wrap my tail around my waist before that
>happens. --- Actually, I think Honda knows that this car is no looker.
>The salesman I spoke with told me that there is already a full body kit
>available from Honda for the car to make it more appealing. My question
>is---if they knew the car was ugly, why didn't they just put the body
>kit on it in the first place?
>
>
I saw a TV commercial for the new Prelude... and yes, it would seem
Honda is aware of the preying-mantis-like garish headlights, for
one... you didn't see them in the commercial.
-Dave
co...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
Just a little injecture here on the looks of the new (5th) gen Prelude.
Is it just me or has anyone noticed more than a passing resemblance
towards the 2nd and 3rd gen Preludes? The square boxy cabin sitting on a
rather "wedgey" body. The rear of the cabin enclosure, esspecially side
windows, scream out older 'Lude to me.
Yes, all the new Acura's are modeled after the look of Merc's and such.
Could it be possible that Honda did get a lot of flak over the last
Prelude and coppied themselves with the popular older models?
__o
_-\<,_ Cosmo Potapoff
(_)/ (_) co...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
Christopher Beck
Dave Simons <bu...@ibm.net> wrote in article
<32966117....@news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net>...
> I saw a TV commercial for the new Prelude... and yes, it would seem
> Honda is aware of the preying-mantis-like garish headlights, for
> one... you didn't see them in the commercial.
Yeah! I noticed that... I found it to be rather amusing! :-D
-Chris
Jim Yanik
In article <575u1m$q...@news.sas.ab.ca>, co...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca says...
I believe that Honda is catering to the aging baby-boomer market,like Nissan
did with the 240SX. By going to the coupe-style body instead of the fast-back
style. I wish that Honda had made the new 'Lude a hatchback like my GSR,as
they are more useful. And made smaller headlights,because they would be harder
for the revenue police to lase.
Laurie & Drew Beck
I still think the new Prelude looks like a 1980 Omni 024 from the front...
Drew
Tony Esporma
Laurie & Drew Beck wrote:
>
> I still think the new Prelude looks like a 1980 Omni 024 from the front...
>
> Drew
This from someone who drives a Chrysler Minivan, fer Chrissakes!
I figure your opinion about a Honda is as useful as a
screen door in a submarine. :-P
Go back to rec.cupholders.on.wheels and stop trolling r.a.m.h
tony
Lloyd R. Parker
Tony Esporma (antonio...@jpl.nasa.gov) wrote:
Tony gets really upset when people that drive comfortable cars that can
actually carry friends and family fail to see why he drives what's
basically a skateboard with a tiny car body mounted on it.
Tony, by your criterion, I expect you to refrain from commenting on any
car other than Hondas then. Or any car bigger than yours.
Why not start a newsgroup "rec.cars.that.rev.real.high.and.look.real.
ugly.and.can't.carry.anything.but.sound.real.cool.man."